Campus Reform rounded up the top five instances of students and professors branding others "white supremacist" or teaching about the concept in class...

Institutions from Salisbury University in Maryland, all the way to California State University-Dominguez Hills have made the list.
1. That time some conservative students tried to buy coffee in their MAGA hats

Students at Fordham University staged a protest against “white supremacy.” The hour-and-a-half-long protest consisted of chants like “hate speech is not free speech” and signs reading “White Supremacy Kills."

“Fordham’s policies and protection of white supremacy is putting people at risk,” one student shouted into a megaphone. Another explained that the protest was meant to elicit a response from university administration.

When asked to provide evidence of white supremacy on their campus, protesters recalled an incident to The Fordham Ram in which a student in charge of an on-campus coffee shop was disciplined for asking College Republicans to leave because of their Make America Great Again gear.

Protesters said showing up to the coffee house in Trump swag was “threatening behavior” and argued that Fordham’s actions constituted “protection of white supremacy.”
2. The professor that went full #Resist in her course syllabus

California State University-Dominguez Hills professor Dr. Brooke Mascagni included in her course syllabus an explanation that President Donald Trump “won the 2016 election by appealing to hatred and bigotry."

The syllabus went on to blame the January government shutdown on Republicans.

"Moreover, the Republican Party controls the executive and legislative branches of government, yet couldn’t manage to keep the government running on the one year anniversary of Trump’s inauguration,” it said.

“And, oh yeah, Russia interfered with the U.S. electoral process and our president is under investigation for obstruction of justice,” Mascagni added.

"Future generations will wonder how the people of what was once considered the greatest democracy in the world elected a white supremacist, misogynist, narcissistic, volatile, belligerent, uninformed, stubborn, failed businessman and orange reality star to the highest office,” she wrote.
3. The 'White Supremacy' checklist

In case you aren’t sure whether or not you’re a white supremacist, a Linfield College English professor made a handy checklist to help you figure it out.

Reshmi Dutt-Ballerstadt published her checklist in a January Inside Higher Edop-ed meant to help individuals determine whether or not they were actively “supporting white supremacy.”

Transgressions on the list included working “in a position of power in a predominantly white institution” and not making an effort “to change the white supremacist power structures within your departments, committees and institutional decision-making process.”

A desire to suggest “‘stellar’ (mostly men) and obviously ‘white’” colleagues for promotions and recognition also helps to aid white supremacy, according to Dutt-Ballerstadt. This type of thinking lends itself to an unacceptable "logic of meritocracy that is built on this racist assumption that everyone has had the same access and opportunities.”
4. The ‘white supremacy’ event held in response to Ben Shapiro’s campus visit

Jewish conservative commentator Ben Shapiro paid a visit to the University of Minnesota for a speaking engagement. The event spurred an ample amount of controversy on campus, as Shapiro’s speeches often do.

In response to this controversy, the university’s Women’s Center scheduled its own event titled “White Supremacy in the Age of Trump: An Anti-Racist Teach-In” directly before Shapiro’s speech. The event had the stated goal of “mapping the connections between white extremist groups and American conservatism today,” as well as "unpacking the ways white supremacy manifests itself in systems, language, and culture.”

“We do not know whether Ben Shapiro is a white supremacist,” organizers of the event told Campus Reform. “What we know is that we have received an outpouring of support.”
5. The ‘Pyramid of White Supremacy'

Students at Maryland’s Salisbury University are required to take a course called “Diversity and the Self” in order to obtain an elementary education major.

This year, the course employed the use of a “Pyramid of White Supremacy,” which ranked different actions that, in theory, allow white supremacy to exist. The actions were placed in a hierarchy, with “indifference” on the bottom, all the way up to “genocide” at the top.

“In a pyramid, every brick depends upon the one below it for support,” a caption explained. “If the bricks at the bottom are removed, the whole structure comes tumbling down.”

Actions such as “remaining apolitical,” saying things like “politics doesn’t affect me,” and “avoiding confrontation with racist family members" were classified as indifference. The next level was titled “minimization,” and included things like speaking over people of color, or believing in a post-racial society.

Step by step, the pyramid increased in severity, from “veiled racism” such as the “bootstrap theory” of lifting oneself up by one’s own bootstraps, to “discrimination” such as “stop and frisk,” to “calls for violence” such as cross burning, until the analogy comes to a close with the “genocide” section.

Salisbury students were quizzed on the pyramid, which implied that phrases such as “Why can’t we all just get along?” were complicit in supporting the mass murder of individuals based on race.

“This class was extremely difficult to get through if you did not think like a liberal. Instead of teaching diversity, this class taught us that being white was a bad thing,” one student told Campus Reform. “We were told that we were only privileged because we are white and basically we did not actually work for what we have.”https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...supremacy-2018

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Campus Reform rounded up five of the most outrageous instances of college faculty and staff who have made statements describing violent acts and inflammatory rhetoric...

1. Yale law prof encourages people to ‘hide immigrants from ICE’

In July, Campus Reform reported on a Yale University professor, Gregg Gonsalves, who suggested on Twitter that “we hide immigrants from ICE if we have to."

The law professor, who did not have a law degree at the time of this initial report, insisted that this would be an act of “civil disobedience,” rather than aiding and abetting criminals.

Gonsalves had made multiple social media posts at the time in support of publicly releasing ICE agents' personal information, an act commonly referred to as "doxxing," stating: “I have no qualms about showing up at ICE regional directors’ homes. They can leave their jobs at the office and feel free from scrutiny at home. Lucky them.”
2. Brooklyn College Prof: Trump's immigration policy goal is to inflate ‘body count’

A Brooklyn College professor of Constitutional Rights and Political Science, Anna O. Law, made several social media posts in July regarding her opinion on immigration.

“Trump’s immigration policy is about inflating 'body count' stats, not about removing dangerous criminals,” Law wrote. “If you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time, without proof of citizenship on your person...any brown person will do.”

Law later responded to her tweet, adding, “Reason, why I’m pointing this out, is that since Trump has now formed a de-naturalization force, one’s citizenship via naturalization is tenuous and apparently contingent on whether the Admin is nativist. Why then tie precious barrels of rights to it?”

“Look at thus [sic] chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist's arrogated entitlement,” Fair tweeted, appearing to reference a video of "Lindsey Graham's tirade," adding that “all of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps."

Fair continued her thoughts on the hearings and the GOP by tweeting, “Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine? Yes.”

Following Campus Reform’s initial report on Fair’s comments, she made specific posts on her blog targeting student journalists in Campus Reform’s Correspondent program.

As of December, Fair is still employed by Georgetown University, although she is on "research leave."
4. Minnesota State University Professor: Virgin Mary didn’t give consent

A Minnesota State University psychology professor, Eric Sprankle, tweeted his opinion that the Virgin Mary, a minor, did not consent to become pregnant with Jesus Christ.

When met with negative criticism of his view on Twitter, Sprankle further explained his position, saying that “the biblical god regularly punished disobedience. The power difference (deity vs mortal) and the potential for violence for saying ‘no’ negates her ‘yes.’”

“To put someone in this position is an unethical abuse of power at best and grossly predatory at worst,” Sprankle concluded.
5. Northeastern University Professor and Admin says feminists have ‘every right’ to ‘hate men’

In a Washington Post op-ed, women and gender studies professor, Suzanna Danuta Walters, wrote that men should “step away” to make room for women, as they “have every right to hate you.”

The Northeastern University professor begins her article with the question: “Is it really so illogical to hate men?”

“Start with this,” Walters instructs men. “Lean out so we can actually just stand up without being beaten down. Pledge to vote for feminist women only. Don’t run for office. Don’t be in charge of anything. Step away from the power.”

“And please know that your crocodile tears won’t be wiped away by us anymore,” Walters admonishes. “We have every right to hate you. You have done us wrong. #BecausePatriarchy. It is long past time to play hard for Team Feminism. And win.”

CNN legal analyst Areva Martin had a race-baiting fail after accusing SiriusXM radio host and Fox News contributor David Webb of "white privilege" during a debate on his Monday morning radio show

While discussing a recent controversy stoked by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) over CBS failing to hire any black journalists to cover the 2020 election, Webb asked Martin what she thought.

Martin said she agreed with Ocasio-Cortez that it was unacceptable for media outlets to claim that there aren't enough journalists of color available, to which Webb responded that he had "31 years" of experience in the media, adding "I’ve seen the coverage, and I’ve also seen it change, generationally … I have not seen the lack of [diversity], I’ve seen, actually growth in it"

Webb then asked Martin if Black Entertainment Television (BET) should be forced to hire a white or Hispanic reporter, which Martin said would be up to BET.

Arguing that that qualifications should be the deciding factor over race, Webb said "I never considered my color the issue. I considered my qualifications the issue," to which Martin replied:

"Well, David, that’s a whole ‘other long conversation about white privilege, the things that you have the privilege of doing that people of color don’t have the privilege of…"

Webb cut in: "How do I have the privilege of white privilege?"

To which Martin shot back: "David, by virtue of being a white male, you have white privilege."

Webb then replied: "Areva, I hate to break it to you, but you should have been better prepped. I’m black … See, you went to white privilege. This is the falsehood in this. You went immediately with an assumption … You’re talking to a black man who started out in rock radio in Boston, who crossed the paths into hip-hop, rebuilding one of the greatest black stations in America, and went on to work for Fox News, where I’m told apparently blacks aren’t supposed to work, but yet you come with this assumption and you go to white privilege. That’s actually insulting!"

Georgia TA: 'Some White People May Have To Die..."
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 20:05

Authored by Eduardo Neret via Campus Reform,

University of Georgia (UGA) teaching assistant wrote Wednesday on Facebook that “some white people may have to die for black communities to be made whole in this struggle to advance to freedom."

UGA philosophy TA Irami Osei-Frimpong made the comment during a conversation on the Overheard at UGA Facebook page. The comment has since been deleted. Osei-Frimpong claimed in May 2017 that Facebook suspended him for quoting from an article which detailed how Texas A&M professor Tommy Curry had said “in order to be equal, in order to be liberated, some white people may have to die.”

“Killing some white people isn’t genocide; it’s killing some white people,” the UGA TA explained in a Medium post.

“We had to kill some white people to get out of slavery. Maybe if we’d killed more during the 20th century we still wouldn’t talk about racialized voter disenfranchisement and housing, education, and employment discrimination. This should not be controversial.”

Osei-Frimpong’s Wednesday comment, seemingly inspired by Curry, is far from the first racially-charged remark made by the scholar.

“Fighting white people is a skill,” the UGA TA tweeted on Jan. 12, adding that it is why he supports integrated schools.

“You have to get used to fighting White people. It takes practice.”

He then quoted American clinical psychologist Bobby Wright, saying, “Blacks kill Blacks because they have never been trained to kill Whites.”

Last semester, at a Young Democrats meeting, Frimpong compared Southern whites in America to “sociopaths” and “autistic kids.” Later on, in November, he called for Democrats to “wage war on the white electorate” and wrote that white “institutions” that “make crappy white people” such as churches, schools, and families must be “dismantled.” Facebook subsequently gave Osei-Frimpong a temporary suspension.

Despite the TA’s history with controversial racial rhetoric, UGA has chosen not to take any action.

Regarding his latest comments, a spokesperson at UGA’s Equal Opportunities Office said in an email obtained by Campus Reform that Osei-Frimpong’s views expressed his “personal opinion,” in his “personal capacity,” on a private platform.

The spokesperson also asked the recipient of the email to contact their office if any information was discovered that showed Osei-Frimpong made “discriminatory or harassing comments” in his capacity as a member of the UGA community.

Some of Osei-Frimpong’s UGA colleagues have gone as far to defend his previous comments about white Americans. UGA Associate Professor of Brain and Behavioral Science Dr. Janet Frick once tweeted that the TA’s comments were not hate speech, but rather “hurt your feelings speech.”

Campus Reform reached out to Osei-Frimpong for further comment but did not receive a response in time for publication.

Editor's note: Campus Reform encourages civil discourse and acknowledges professors' First Amendment right to free speech. The purpose of this article, like any other, is to present the facts and allow our readers to form their own opinionshttps://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...e-may-have-die

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea

The concept of 'social justice' is predicated on the belief that white people are inherently racist and are responsible for all the problems in the world. For adherents to this belief system the pursuit of 'social justice' then hinges around removing white people from existence as some sort of moral imperitive

But the deeper i explore into history the more this idea falls apart. One thing I've found is that non white people were perfectly capable of misbehaving before they had contact with white people for example slavery was common in africa and people were sacrificing each other in the americas and head hunting each other in the jungles of borneo etc etc

Another thing i've found is that much of what is being blamed on white people was actually being carried out by jewish people and freemasons (who are themselves descended from jewish knights templar bloodlines)

For example the trans-atlantic slave trade was largely run by jewish people and was largely financed by them. They owned slave ships, they ran slave markets, they owned proportionately more slaves in the americas than white people did. They also financed the sugar trade which was part of that triangular trade and they ran the sugar processing plants. Why do we not hear about that?

White people are being scapegoated unfairly for all the crimes of history in this post truth world. This idea of painting a target on the backs of white people while injecting millions of non-white people into their geographic locale does not strike me as a formula for societal harmony

I think this debate needs some perspective to restore some sanity; its time to hold up a mirror to the actions of others

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

The goal of the Cultural Revolution isn't to persuade, it's to enforce compliance.

A Cultural Revolution is a movement designed to preserve the political and financial power of a ruling elite by social rather than political or financial means. Thus the primary tools of a Cultural Revolution are not redistributing power via elections (politics) or financial reforms; the primary tools are public shaming and denouncements, purges of those in positions of authority, show trials, guilt-by-association, wholesale denouncements of entire classes and widespread accusations of anti-progressive ("counter-revolutionary") tendencies in which guilt is defined by all-or-nothing litmus tests of one's loyalties to the Cultural Revolution's strict ideology.

You haven't memorized Mao's Little Red Book? Off to re-education camp you go. Or house arrest, banishment, beatings, imprisonment or if the mob's blood lust demands it, execution.

The key dynamic of a Cultural Revolution is the oppressors appropriate the language of liberation as their favored tool of suppressing dissent, denouncing opponents and fueling widespread purges of anyone who might harbor the slightest potential to question the social suppression of dissent.

Now, more than a half-century after the Cultural Revolution began, there is little public discussion of that period in China. What some have called the nation’s collective amnesia has only gotten worse in recent years as leaders have walked back efforts to reckon with the country’s modern history.

To those launching a Cultural Revolution, the solution to a diversity of opinion is to crush dissent and narratives that threaten the ruling elites' power. This is of course the exact opposite of democracy and Enlightenment-era liberalism. But the point of a Cultural Revolution isn't to broaden political enfranchisement or representation--the point of the anti-Deplorables / anti-Brexit / anti-yellow vest campaigns is to strip dissenters (those who disagree with the ruling neoliberal elites) of political and social representation.

The goal of the Cultural Revolution is to render all those who resist the ruling elites politically and socially invisible. The goal isn't to play nice and share power and wealth with the losers of financialization-globalization; the goal is to liquidate their influence in politics and society via relentless negative stereotyping by the elite-controlled mass media and an Orwellian reversal of identity that makes the dissenters into threats to democracy while elevating the elitist oppressors into selfless guardians of democracy--the exact opposite of reality.

In China's Cultural Revolution, the Red Guards mindlessly destroyed much of China's priceless cultural heritage as part of the deranged agenda of destroying whatever was traditional and valued by "counter-revolutionaries." Out with the old, in with the new--the time-honored pattern of power grabs masked by utopian goals.

If in doubt, purge, destroy, denounce. This is the Inquisition nature of all Cultural Revolutions.

China's ruling elites don't want any unedited history of the Cultural Revolution to leak into the public sphere because virtually everyone who was killed, tortured, imprisoned or denounced was innocent. Virtually every one of the millions of victims of the Cultural Revolution was a loyal cadre or average citizen going about their lives. "Counter-revolutionaries" were an illusory, fabricated threat.

Since we have many friends in China, we've heard the reality of the Cultural Revolution in private conversations, spoken in low tones even in the U.S. Nobody dares speak openly about what happened or the Party's role. One friend's father was an officer in the People's Liberation Army, a man whose loyalty was unquestioned. He was imprisoned. Another friend's father was put in house arrest for years because he'd visited Eastern Europe (at the Party's behest, of course) and was therefore suspect.

In Cultural Revolutions, the "crimes" are fabricated but the destruction is real.Take a look at the mainstream media coverage in France, the U.S. and the U.K. of the yellow vest dissenters. Make a list of all the public officials, intellectuals, actors, media pundits etc. who publicly defend the yellow vests and how many denounce them. Did you find any articles on the yellow vests on Page One? What percentage of the corporate-state media depicted the yellow vests as violent, unreasonable, and so on?

If you pursue an objective survey, you'll find few public figures supporting the yellow vest movement and little mainstream media coverage that presents the yellow vest movement in a positive light.

That's how Cultural Revolutions roll. The Nobility in our neofeudal system will work all the levers of power to marginalize, demonize, stereotype and disenfranchise any threats to their power.

The goal of the Cultural Revolution isn't to persuade, it's to enforce compliance. Virtue-signal your compliance in social media every day (i.e. wave your Little Red Book publicly) or you become suspect. Nobody cares what you actually believe, the point is to prove your compliance and complicity to those enforcing compliance and complicity.https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ral-revolution

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

There was another story recently where three young black women accused some young white men of bullying them on a bus

But then the footage was released which appears to show the black women bullying the white men off the bus

We are going to see more and more of this war through victimhood where people hide their own aggression behind a badge of victimhood so that they can use a claim of victimhood as a WEAPON to push their own racial agendas

Why this is going to be so devastating for society is because it will remove MORALITY. It will remove any sense of right or wrong from a situation. People will no longer look at a situation and ask objectively 'who is in the right and who is in the wrong' regardless of skin colour

Instead people will first look at the skin colour and then decide from that who is right and who is wrong

It will create a world of injustice

They will try and hide this injustice by saying they are working on a wider level for 'social justice'. So for example if a black person rapes or murders a white person that will not be perceived as rape or murder it will be perceived as 'social justice'

Because the system is run by monopoly capitalist jewish oligarchs who are working to build a technocratic communist state there will be no protection for white people from the system

Any crime against white people will simply be explained away as 'social justice'
Carlson on 'fake hate hoaxes' after Jussie Smollett fake attack developments

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

CBS News chief foreign affairs correspondent Lara Logan has broken ranks and admitted that journalists have lost their objectivity and become "political activists."

"85% of journalists are registered Democrats," Logan said. "How do you know you’re being lied to? How do you know you’re being manipulated? How do you know there’s something not right with the coverage? When they simplify it all [and] there’s no grey. It’s all one way. Well, life isn’t like that. If it doesn’t match real life, it’s probably not. Something’s wrong. For example, all the coverage on Trump all the time is negative. … That’s a distortion of the way things go in real life."

"When you turn on your computer, or you walk past the TV, or you see a newspaper headline in the grocery store If they’re all saying the same thing, the weight of that convinces you that it’s true," said Logan. "You don’t question it, because everyone is saying it."

She also admitted that journalists today are more or less lobbyists for liberal interests, adding that the weight of the liberal media machine overwhelms "the other side" unless people actively seek outlets such as Breitbart. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...alists-are-now

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Now that Jussie Smollett has been arrested for manufacturing a “hate crime”—his duplicity was obvious from the start—it is time for the corporate media to move on to the next manufactured act designed to make all white males out to be racist homicidal maniacs.

Hours before Smollett was arrested for his vicious hoax, one Christopher Paul Hasson was arrested and accused of wanting to kill just about every human on earth, especially black people.

It is public knowledge the FBI has for years trolled the mentally ill and naive Muslims and framed them for terror plots like something out of a Tom Clancy novel. The agency has gone so far as to have “informers” arrange to sale of weapons and inert bombs to folks who should be on anti-psychotic meds, and then rolling these orchestrated fantasies out every few months as examples why the government should continue and expand the war on terror.

The Muslim “threat” is now well past its expiration date. The infrastructure—the NSA, DHS, fusion centers, police militarization, anti-terror public-private partnerships, etc.—is now in place and the real enemies of the state (constitutionalists, libertarians, antiwar activists) are to be targeted and liquidated in a rerun of COINTELPRO.

For the intersectional identity politics crowd, Jussie Smollett is an embarrassment. It shows how these people are vindictive liars and their “smirking privileged white male” nonsense is nothing more than a hateful fantasy that has—thanks to the state’s propaganda media—managed to brainwash millions of Americans.

The Hasson case—real or imagined—will further radicalize a growing number of intellectually impotent progressives who believe white people (especially straight males) should not only be made to pay reparations for sins against “marginalized communities,” but should in fact not exist at all. https://www.davidicke.com/article/52...-smollett-fail

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Institutional racism against straight white males will only deepen showing that the progressive agenda was never about 'equality'
hite heterosexual males face discrimination everywhere, man says after winning employment tribunal
'Had I lied on my interview form and said I was bisexual, there's a strong possibility I would be working for Cheshire Police now'

Colin Drury
@colin__drury

A potential police recruit who was rejected from a force because he is white, male and heterosexual has said he believes many other men may have been similarly discriminated against.

An employment tribunal found Cheshire Police was guilty of discrimination against Matthew Furlong on the grounds of sexual orientation, race and gender after his application to join was unsuccessful.

The 25-year-old particle physics graduate, who applied to be a constable in 2017, discovered he had been turned down because the force needed more diverse candidates.

So some people want black people to have self esteem so that they can feel empowered and i have no problem with that except i believe that the people behind hollywood are not really empowering black people with things like 'black panther'. What i think they are really doing is cultivating RESENTMENT so that they can stoke racial tensions

What the marxists will never discuss as a source of self esteem for black boys is fatherhood. They will never say that boys benefit from having a stable and supporting male role model around. No instead the marxists have waged war against the family which has seen illigitimacy sky rocket in black communities and many black boys raised by women

This is because the ultimate aim of the marxists is to replace the family with the state

I'm not saying that single mums don't raise their children with love; what i'm saying is that no woman can be both a mother and father to children despite what jewish marxist feminists will try and tell you

if you want self esteem then it helps to live in dignity. This means freedom from debt servitude to the jewish central banking cabal

It doesn't mean being treated as a special needs through affirmative action. It means boys learning from fathers how to be responsible men and then contibuting in productive ways to their community and their wider nation

THATS the discussion the marxists don't want to have because they do not want to encourage personal responsiblity; they want to encourage dependence on the state because they want everyone to be lapdogs feeding from the hand of the rothschild-cabal supremacists who will be behind that all powerful marxist state

And that is NOT freedom that is servitude

THAT is what existed on slave plantations and that is what the rothschild cabal are building with their technocracy: a giant slave plantation

Why Is The Deep State Promoting Black Panther At The Oscars?

__________________
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act